The first article is Connell O’Donovon’s highly detailed account of gay electroshock- and vomit-aversion therepy performed at BYU. (Scroll down about three quarters of the way until you reach “Shocking Events at the Y”.)

The second article is FAIR’s evasive and, at times, downright dishonest account of the same.

I apologize for the length of these articles, but both are fascinating and highly informative, especially that by Connell O’Donovon. The article by FAIR is also fascinating in that it constitutes yet another example of “lying for the Lord”.

The first article is Connell O’Donovon’s highly detailed account of gay electroshock- and vomit-aversion therepy performed at BYU. (Scroll down about three quarters of the way until you reach “Shocking Events at the Y”.)

The second article is FAIR’s evasive and, at times, downright dishonest account of the same.

I apologize for the length of these articles, but both are fascinating and highly informative, especially that by Connell O’Donovon. The article by FAIR is also fascinating in that it constitutes yet another example of “lying for the Lord”.

Decided to "just have a quick look" at the Connell O'Donovan article and couldn't stop reading. Just blew my lunch hour reading this thing. Fascinating - very well done.

A few weeks ago I was in Las Vegas on a business trip with a some ex-mormon colleagues. (Those who may have read posts wherein I have talked about our company know that we have a lot of 'em). The wife of one of these individuals also happened to be the mother of a very successful gay ex-mormon son. We were driving around killing time waiting for a red-eye flight home and the subject turned to Evergreen and the highly unethical treatment of gay members by the LDS Church of the kind described in the article.

Turns out this woman had never heard of this stuff before. As the conversation continued in this vein, she became more and more angry. Noticing her discomfort, I asked if her son (who had served an honorable mission) had even encountered Evergreen or this kind of rampant homophobia in the Church.

When she answered that he had not (at the level of electroshock anyway), I asked her why she seemed so upset. After all, I said, this is well known stuff. Sort of a mistake on my part - because it was not well known to her.

As she came to realize that we were not kidding about this stuff, she became truly outraged. At one point she said that she was ready to drive up to Salt Lake City and confront one or more senior Church leaders (BKP was mentioned specifically) while well armed. The idea was actually discussed briefly and dropped. The rental contract on the car was up and she didn't have a 12 gauge with her.__________

subgenius,

What may seem boring to you is life-changing to many. If you ever want to be an effective apologist, you would be a lot better off to read and understand this stuff, rather than to try to dodge and dismiss it out of hand.

Whether you believe it or not, this issue is a huge problem for the LDS Church and for those unfortunate enough to have taken up the burden of LDS apologetics. Running away from it doesn't help.

Also, why the concern about whether or not criminals have catapults? I think you will find that number of serious crimes being committed with catapults is truly insignificant. ;-)

i read most of each, and then passed out from boredom.At best, the pro-biased-conspiracy laden LGBT link had interesting historical pictures.

Exactly what is the "lie" in the following statement on this subject?:The Church never conducted aversion therapy. It doesn't conduct psychological therapy of any type. The LDS Church is a church, not a medical institution. People who happen to be LDS or go to BYU do a great variety of things. The Church does not take responsibility for everything done by a Mormon or someone at BYU (not everyone at BYU is a Mormon).

Once again, we see the LGBT's "issues" played out in some protracted manner as if to exclaim "Gotcha!", when in fact i do not think the Church has ever been ambiguous on its stance on LGBT.As for your feeble attempt to associate BYU as the Church, good luck with that.Now, i would also like to note that FAIR, by its own admission, is not owned, controlled by or affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.....Yawn

_________________Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your libertyI can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at themwhat is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams

What may seem boring to you is life-changing to many. If you ever want to be an effective apologist, you would be a lot better off to read and understand this stuff, rather than to try to dodge and dismiss it out of hand.

Whether you believe it or not, this issue is a huge problem for the LDS Church and for those unfortunate enough to have taken up the burden of LDS apologetics. Running away from it doesn't help.

Also, why the concern about whether or not criminals have catapults? I think you will find that number of serious crimes being committed with catapults is truly insignificant. ;-)

1. an apologist for BYU i have never claimed to be, the position of the LDS Church is quite clear when it comes to the LGBT community. Speculation about motives and would-be conspiracies from 4 and 5 decades ago has little modern-day applicability or interest. I dismiss it because it offers little new, pedestrian at best.2. I am not aware of it being a "huge" problem. Do you mean to say that the LGBT is upset at the Church? well, i guess that does it!3. Truly insignificant to those except they who were victims. It is my feeble attempt to invoke the Archie Bunker "would you feel better if they were pushed out a window?" proposal.

Was anyone ever forced to undergo any type of therapy? was anyone kidnapped and strapped to electrodes?

_________________Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your libertyI can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at themwhat is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams

i read most of each, and then passed out from boredom.At best, the pro-biased-conspiracy laden LGBT link had interesting historical pictures.

Exactly what is the "lie" in the following statement on this subject?:The Church never conducted aversion therapy. It doesn't conduct psychological therapy of any type. The LDS Church is a church, not a medical institution. People who happen to be LDS or go to BYU do a great variety of things. The Church does not take responsibility for everything done by a Mormon or someone at BYU (not everyone at BYU is a Mormon).

...indicating that in two hours and fourteen minutes you only managed to read the first four sentences of FAIR’s “boring” rebuttal, looked at some pictures in the O’Donovon article, and then “passed out form boredom”.

Okay subgenius, let's run some numbers. Let's figure out what it cost the Church in the one single case with which I am most familiar.

We can start with one insignificant homosexual individual (who, since he is gay, is obviously if little consequence in your scheme of things). But rather than talk about mere humans, or tearing apart families, or any of that inconsequential stuff, let's focus on what really seems to matter to the LDS Church- what the members hear about as much as any other subject, and more than most - money (in the form of tithing).

Here is a quick calculation to illustrate what driving one inconsequential gay individual out of the Church ended up costing the Church in tithing and contributions.

This gay individual left the Church, as did his father and the three brothers in the family: total combined salary + tithed capital gains= well north of $2 million per year.

Tithing and contributions lost to the LDS Church were more than $220,000 per year. Multiply this times a very conservative 30 year work life and it comes to something like 6.6 million dollars.

This is due to the loss of a single upper middle class gay individual and the consequent loss of his entire family including all parents, siblings, sibling spouses, and grandchildren. This is not theoretical. This is actual.

Next time you talk to your Stake President or Area Representative, why don't you tell him you stand ready to make a donation to the Church of 6.6 million dollars. See if his reaction seems appropriate for "inconsequential".

You really should read what you write before you post it. As I have in the past with some of DCP's comments, yours on this thread is one that I will be forwarding to certain doubting Mormons that I know, including some in my own family. Some of them have been quite effective in helping these folks see Mormonism for what it really is.

Decided to "just have a quick look" at the Connell O'Donovan article and couldn't stop reading. Just blew my lunch hour reading this thing. Fascinating - very well done.

I used to think that Mormon history got dull and uninteresting after polygamy ended…boy was I ever wrong.

The thing that fascinates me the most is that the Church used to be rather tolerant of practicing gay and lesbian Mormons, at least until the Kook Faction rose to prominence among the Brethren. (By Kook Faction, I mean J. Reuben Clark, Ezra Taft Benson, Ernest L. Wilkenson, W. Cleon Skousen, …and Glenn Beck.)

Quote:

Turns out this woman had never heard of this stuff before. As the conversation continued in this vein, she became more and more angry. Noticing her discomfort, I asked if her son (who had served an honorable mission) had even encountered Evergreen or this kind of rampant homophobia in the Church.

When she answered that he had not (at the level of electroshock anyway), I asked her why she seemed so upset. After all, I said, this is well known stuff. Sort of a mistake on my part - because it was not well known to her.

Was her son treated at Evergreen? Would you happen to know whether and how much Evergreen’s treatment program differs from that of BYU during the 70’s?

In any case, I’m glad her son made it out alive and healthy!

Harmony wrote:

Quote:

Even though you're being sarcastic... in a very real sense, you're correct.

I agree, the wisest thing these gay and lesbian students could have done was to have gotten the hell out of BYU--and Mormonism--like they were getting the hell out of a burning building.

But for whatever reason they didn't--or couldn't--abandon the Church and, to a large extent, their families as well. It certainly didn’t help that BYU threatened them with expulsion, forfeiture of their tuition & academic credits, and excommunication. The social pressure to submit to these “experiments” must have been enormous.

And naturally BYU--and by extension the Church--was careful to cover its butt by insisting the students sign nondisclosure forms and legal liability waivers before undergoing treatment.

The young gay man in question did not encounter Evergreen or BYU "therapy". What he did encounter was a home ward that not only shunned him when he came out after his mission, but to some degree, shunned the entire family, including siblings and spouses.

The father (my business partner) had been prominent in the ward. The treatment they received was especially difficult on the wife, whose whole life had revolved around her children and the Church.

I have described these events before on message boards, but in effect, the entire family decided to support the gay son and left the Church, en masse, from one week to the next.

This just broke the mother's heart. Now, years later, she still talks like a Mormon and acts like a Mormon, except she does not go to Church.

She does still go to lunch once a month with a group of women (including Dear Wife) who started a lunch group when they were all active. Of this group of six, two have left the Church, one (Dear Wife) is NOM and fading fast, and one just had her eternal husband serve divorce papers on her - out of the blue - so she is headed out as well. The two women who remain TBM are having some issues reconciling their attitudes about Church with what they see hapening to their friends. So, two thirds of that core group of former TBMs have essentially left the Church in the last four or five years. And, according to Dear Wife, the two that are left certainly know that the Church is not what it claims to be._____________________________

BTW, the young man in question finished up his MBA and is now in charge of a division of a major financial services firm in Boston. He and his life partner just adopted a child.

At one point she said that she was ready to drive up to Salt Lake City and confront one or more senior Church leaders (BKP was mentioned specifically) while well armed. The idea was actually discussed briefly and dropped. The rental contract on the car was up and she didn't have a 12 gauge with her.

Lovely. A group of exmormons contemplating murder.

_________________... she said that she was ready to drive up to Salt Lake City and confront ... Church leaders ... while well armed. The idea was ... dropped ... [because] she didn't have a 12 gauge with her.-DrW about his friends (Link)

so you keep asking, but with regards to this thread's OP.....what lie are you referring to?

Quote:

At 10:27 (my local time) you posted:....<snip>...indicating that in two hours and fourteen minutes you only managed to read the first four sentences of FAIR’s “boring” rebuttal, looked at some pictures in the O’Donovon article, and then “passed out form boredom”.

At 10:35 (my local time) Subgenius asked, “Was anyone ever forced to undergo any type of therapy? was anyone kidnapped and strapped to electrodes?”

Quote:

This is an excellent question and the O’Donovon article answers it in great detail, but you would know that if you had actually read it.

The O'Don article uses the word "force(d)" - 37 times, "choose" -3 times "chose(n)"- 5 times. He scatters about quotes seasoned with his bias notions of the great persecution of the homosexual...blah blah blah. Bottom line was that no one was forced against their will to attend BYU and receive aversion therapy, and all universities have guinea-pig-students sign a release, duh. His self-noted obsession with homosexuality and Mormons is peculiar (to say the least) totaling some "8 lineal feet". There is little credibility given his resume and the actual historic documents he provides show little worth towards any significant means of condemnation.

Maybe i missed the big apologetic "lie" on this topic, but again, i did doze off.

_________________Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your libertyI can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at themwhat is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams

The O'Don article uses the word "force(d)" - 37 times, "choose" -3 times "chose(n)"- 5 times. He scatters about quotes seasoned with his bias notions of the great persecution of the homosexual...blah blah blah. Bottom line was that no one was forced against their will to attend BYU and receive aversion therapy, and all universities have guinea-pig-students sign a release, duh. His self-noted obsession with homosexuality and Mormons is peculiar (to say the least) totaling some "8 lineal feet". There is little credibility given his resume and the actual historic documents he provides show little worth towards any significant means of condemnation.

Maybe i missed the big apologetic "lie" on this topic, but again, i did doze off.

Whoa. There are several things wrong with the underlined statement.

1. certainly not all universities engaged in electroshock studies on homosexual men.

2. any studies done by universities always have papers written about those studies. Where is BYU's paper on the electroshock studies?

3. non-disclosure statements are definitely NOT the norm in university studies.

Good grief. Back up the bus and clarify what you really meant, because what you said is not correct.

_________________(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.